Do yourself a favor and google "proximate cause doctrine", migheven happen that one of the forum's resident barristers will chime in with a tutorial for you.

In broad terms the general rule is that a gun owner would be no more liable for the criminal use of their stolen gun than a car owner would be responsible for the criminal use of their stolen car. There is a vast collection of case law that provided precidence for this.

Negligence alone is not sufficient to attach liability to the stolen property's owner because they failed to lock or otherwise secure their property and the stolen property was subsequently used criminally.